Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 06:22:01 -0400 From: Tom Rhodes <trhodes@FreeBSD.org> To: Doug Barton <DougB@FreeBSD.org> Cc: doc-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: www/en docs.sgml Message-ID: <20030414062201.184a0581.trhodes@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20030413145741.S28372@znfgre.tberna.bet> References: <200304082353.h38NrZXM010842@repoman.freebsd.org> <20030412183216.Z43794@freebsdmall.com> <20030413145741.S28372@znfgre.tberna.bet>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 13 Apr 2003 14:58:56 -0700 (PDT) Doug Barton <DougB@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > On Sat, 12 Apr 2003, Murray Stokely wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 04:53:35PM -0700, Christian Brueffer wrote: > > > Log: > > > s/IPSec/IPsec/ > > > > Please add this spelling in the word list in the Doc Project Primer. > > Both the new and old spelling are different from that listed on the > > O'Reilly word list for authors. > > Do you have a URL for that? And how do they list it? The RFC's have it as > IPSec, IPSEC, and IPsec, with the last being the most popular. Seems like > as long as we're consistent, we're at least in the ballpark. > Personally, last I checked, we were using the `IPSec' spelling in both the sources and in most (if not all) of the documentation. I think it should just stay like that. -- Tom Rhodes
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030414062201.184a0581.trhodes>